Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Brinqa vs Tenable Security Center comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Brinqa
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
42nd
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
32nd
Ranking in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
16th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Attack Surface Management (ASM) (18th)
Tenable Security Center
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
4th
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
13th
Ranking in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

RB
Allows us to configure the risk algorithm to suit our specific needs
I would give the easiness of the initial setup a seven out of ten. It can be a bit complex. Some connections are straightforward, but some take a long time. Deploying Brinqa took time, as it was done in phases. Initially, it took about six months before we started getting valuable data from it. Then, it expanded from there. The deployment began with a product demo and contract negotiation. We connected some data sources to Brinqa's cloud service, which was straightforward. We used the default risk ranking algorithm but faced issues with the dashboards, so we customized them to fit our organization's needs over a few years. We depended a lot on Brinqa for the deployment. We had some internal resources, but they lacked the needed skills, so it took time to train our two-man team. Initially, it required one person for maintenance, and they spent most of their time on it.
JoaoManso - PeerSpot reviewer
Good dashboards, reporting, and technical support, with a low rate of errors
Parallel scanning would be a nice improvement because it would speed up the detection process. It is not possible to search for vulnerabilities and do compliance checking at the same time. Rather, they are done one after the other. The integration is very good, although it still needs to improve. For example, it would be useful to have better integration with other tools in the space of identity management (IAM). As it is now, integration with new tools has to be developed specifically, so it's not easy. We would like to see better collection capability for external data that will help to improve detection and discovery.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable features of Brinqa are its data integration capabilities."
"The valauble feature is compliance reporting system."
"Support is knowledgeable."
"The usability is really good. It's very easy to use and a good platform. It is scalable and very stable. The technical support is fine and the setup is super easy."
"Tenable SC is good for reporting and alerting. The filtering feature is also very valuable. Its integration with multiple vendors is quite good. It can be integrated with SIEM solutions and PAM solutions such as Thycotic, which is very helpful."
"It is a very good and user-friendly product."
"The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view to create a new dashboard, and it works out very well for our needs."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"The most valuable feature is the automatic and periodic management of security scans, along with the ability to consolidate all information into a single dashboard."
 

Cons

"Brinqa could improve in terms of the speed of their service and resource provision."
"The integration is very good, although it still needs to improve."
"The solution should provide better web application features and support."
"Current web page needs improvement, slows down processes."
"Certain aspects require manual effort, such as exporting and analyzing data for our dashboards. The built-in components of the Tenable solution are somewhat clumsy that require external tools. So, this is an area of improvement."
"Its reporting can be improved. It is not easy to generate a scan report the way we want. The data is okay, but we can't easily change the template to make it look the way we want."
"In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve."
"I think the vendor training provided for Tenable.sc could be a lower price. It's quite expensive for the training."
"Tenable SC could be improved with additional connectivity to external company postures and the capability of managing and sustaining agents in the systems directly without additional platforms in the middle."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The price of Tenable SC is expensive, we pay approximately €70,000 for the license annually. We have to pay for each IP test. The cost of other solutions is far less, such as Nessus Professional, which is €3,000 annually."
"It is a bit expensive. Everything is included in the license."
"We're a Fortune 500 company... our licensing costs [are] in the seven figures."
"We pay around 60,000 on a yearly basis."
"I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten, where ten is expensive. It is the most expensive tool my company is using."
"Costing is pretty reasonable compared to the competition."
"The pricing is more than Nexpose."
"We're able to save because we don't have to employ more staff members to help wit ht he scheduling of the scans, running the reports or sending them out to the systems owners. That alone is a big ROI for us."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Risk-Based Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Retailer
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
9%
Educational Organization
22%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Brinqa?
The most valuable features of Brinqa are its data integration capabilities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Brinqa?
I would rate the costliness of the solution at a seven out of ten. It is on the expensive side and there are some additional fees.
What needs improvement with Brinqa?
Brinqa could improve in terms of the speed of their service and resource provision. We felt they were somewhat slow in assisting us in maturing our processes. Additionally, we encountered some stab...
What do you like most about Tenable SC?
The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view to create a new dashboard, and it works out very well for our needs.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
The product is somewhat pricey, reflecting its valuable features and status as a high-quality solution in the vulnerability management market.
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
While Tenable Security Center is highly effective, there is always room for continuous improvements. The reports and plugins for reports and scans could benefit from enhancements. Overall, it is a ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7 and others in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.